I would suggest you that legalized abortion was around in the US in the1700s and 1800s in the form of over the counter help. T wasn't until physicians realized they were losing money in the abortion game that they decided they wanted to top it so they campaigned for making illegal and using the morals thing. So we never had morals as a country I guess.

I would like to re-state that this is not about abortion. It is about being a surrogate. If a couple that could not have children went through the process of having a surrogate, and that surrogate signed all the legal documentation and then gave birth to a child that shared no DNA with her, she could not simply change her mind and keep the child. Regardless if she felt the biological parents were not going to be good parents.

Question. What would happen in a normal surrogate situation if the surrogate wanted to keep the baby and fled to a State where it was illegal? Would the surrogate be able to keep the baby? Or would she have to give it back to the biological parents? I would assume the same rules would apply. Adding in the abortion debate only muddies the situation.

I would like to re-state that this is not about abortion. It is about being a surrogate. If a couple that could not have children went through the process of having a surrogate, and that surrogate signed all the legal documentation and then gave birth to a child that shared no DNA with her, she could not simply change her mind and keep the child. Regardless if she felt the biological parents were not going to be good parents.

Question. What would happen in a normal surrogate situation if the surrogate wanted to keep the baby and fled to a State where it was illegal? Would the surrogate be able to keep the baby? Or would she have to give it back to the biological parents? I would assume the same rules would apply. Adding in the abortion debate only muddies the situation.

The surrogate would not be the mother (and never was). She was an incubator, to put it bluntly, and has zero rights to a child she gave birth to that it not biologically hers. What do you mean by illegal, exactly? Surrogacy as a whole? Is that common in the US, that states just don't allow surrogacy? Or that they don't allow payment for surrogacy and don't recognize contracts between parents and surrogates?

And predictably, the introduction of an unrelated debate topic with no facts surrounding it has, in fact, further muddied the debate.

Bonita, I wish you would stop doing this. First you falsely accused people of calling one another names we werent calling one another, and now you are lecturing us to not talk about the stated topic of the debate, and now you are trying to change the debate topic by bringing up an unrelated topic. Just start a new debate topic if you want to talk about a surrogate keeping a baby, or find a case where one did. I don't like being lectured (who does?), I'm a 37 year old woman, lets all treat one another like adults please, okay? It really would help debates go better. If you don't like how a debate is going, don't participate in it. This debate WAS about abortion, the very title let you know that, if you weren't comfortable with that (and not everyone is, that is okay!) please, please don't participate, rather than ruining it for other people. I'm very much not trying to be unkind, but it is not fair of you to make untrue accusations or to steer the debate onto other subjects when other people are enjoying a debate which is related to the original topic. Thank you.

As to your question? Well, if you googled a little I bet you could relate it to this debate, which may make it interesting as it pertains to this debate. One would think that a surrogate would have a fighting chance of keeping a baby if she took off to Michigan. Michigan seems to legally recognize a birth mother as a legal mother. Then again, it seems unbelievable to me that a woman could literally steal a fetus as a surrogate, birth it and keep it (though its close- sub adoption- to what happened here). Again, its a different debate. Now, off into the dark. Ciao.

Most people here seem to agree that she signed something and should only of signed it in good faith that she would do what they asked. Of course things are different when you are faced with the decision. For whatever reason, when asked to terminate, she got cold feet and refused.

I think Bonita's point is a valid one. The cases I saw where the surrogate wanted to keep the baby are in states where surrogacy is legal. What this woman did was kidnapping and to me there is no difference between her keeping the baby and her adpoting out the baby. In her case, she was just smart enough to go to a state where her agreement was void. I say this argument is not about abortion but what the surrogate's rights are for her body, If it is just about the abortion issue then people who think abortion is murder can only argue that the woman did the right thing, even if it is illegal. Then this debate just becomes about whether you see abortion as murder or not.

If this case it truely just about abortion then what does that mean? She made an agreement and backed out. How should that be dealt with? Is she forced to go through with it? If she is "just a womb" then her right to choice doesn't matter . I think she was wrong to sign but the idea of her being forced to go through with the abortion bothers me just as much as her defying the bio-parents wishes. If she refuses to show up for the procedure, how much force can be used to make her go?

Most people here seem to agree that she signed something and should only of signed it in good faith that she would do what they asked. Of course things are different when you are faced with the decision. For whatever reason, when asked to terminate, she got cold feet and refused.

I think Bonita's point is a valid one. The cases I saw where the surrogate wanted to keep the baby are in states where surrogacy is legal. What this woman did was kidnapping and to me there is no difference between her keeping the baby and her adpoting out the baby. In her case, she was just smart enough to go to a state where her agreement was void. I say this argument is not about abortion but what the surrogate's rights are for her body, If it is just about the abortion issue then people who think abortion is murder can only argue that the woman did the right thing, even if it is illegal. Then this debate just becomes about whether you see abortion as murder or not.

If this case it truely just about abortion then what does that mean? She made an agreement and backed out. How should that be dealt with? Is she forced to go through with it? If she is "just a womb" then her right to choice doesn't matter . I think she was wrong to sign but the idea of her being forced to go through with the abortion bothers me just as much as her defying the bio-parents wishes. If she refuses to show up for the procedure, how much force can be used to make her go?

But with all due respect those are points that have already been covered. This is America- NO ONE can force her to have an abortion against her will and not a single person on this thread advocated doing so.

And yes, every single person on this thread OTHER than Rivergallery and Gloria agrees that this was kidnapping. All of this has been said already.

It was put out there at she fled to a state where surrogacy was illegal.

Originally Posted by Potter75

And predictably, the introduction of an unrelated debate topic with no facts surrounding it has, in fact, further muddied the debate.

Bonita, I wish you would stop doing this. First you falsely accused people of calling one another names we werent calling one another, and now you are lecturing us to not talk about the stated topic of the debate, and now you are trying to change the debate topic by bringing up an unrelated topic. Just start a new debate topic if you want to talk about a surrogate keeping a baby, or find a case where one did. I don't like being lectured (who does?), I'm a 37 year old woman, lets all treat one another like adults please, okay? It really would help debates go better. If you don't like how a debate is going, don't participate in it. This debate WAS about abortion, the very title let you know that, if you weren't comfortable with that (and not everyone is, that is okay!) please, please don't participate, rather than ruining it for other people. I'm very much not trying to be unkind, but it is not fair of you to make untrue accusations or to steer the debate onto other subjects when other people are enjoying a debate which is related to the original topic. Thank you.

As to your question? Well, if you googled a little I bet you could relate it to this debate, which may make it interesting as it pertains to this debate. One would think that a surrogate would have a fighting chance of keeping a baby if she took off to Michigan. Michigan seems to legally recognize a birth mother as a legal mother. Then again, it seems unbelievable to me that a woman could literally steal a fetus as a surrogate, birth it and keep it (though its close- sub adoption- to what happened here). Again, its a different debate. Now, off into the dark. Ciao.

What are you possibly talking about? I was not lecturing anyone about being off topic. I was making the point that you can't make this case about abortion. I am strongly against abortion, that said, I do not think this case can be decided by whether or not you are against abortion or not. I in no way was even thinking of you when I made my post.

I have every much a right to debate on this board as you do. As you so commonly recommend, if you have a problem with how I debate, please feel free to not respond to any of my commits. Other than quitting the debate board, I do not know how else do deal with your dislike for how I post.

Signing the contract, and then not agreeing to the terms (AKA Not having the abortion) Wrong.
Asking for more money in order to have the abortion? Horrible
Leaving the state with the unborn baby to have it somewhere else and give it to the person she wanted to give it to, especially AFTER the parents had accepted her refusal to abort and had a plan of their own...again Horrible.

Now the rest is just opinion and ultimately does not affect my feelings
I really can't condone any of those things BUT, i can see how she might have come to those decisions.

Now the rest is just conjecture, i dont' know these people, its just kind of my gut feeling (and therefore these thigns don't influence my opinion on whether the immediate decisions made were right or wrong)

I think its very feasible that she is pro-life and have very serious problems with aborting the baby yet still sign the contract (even though she was wrong to do so). Its the old "this will never happen to me" thing. Especially if she was in serious need of the money and didn't want to hurt any chances of being matched with someone. Bad and wrong decision, yet i can see how someone would do the wrong thing here.

I would imagine the moment she found herself in this position it probably sent her into a panic. I can only imagine how awful it must be if you feel that having an abortion was morally wrong and you have now put yourself in a position where you are supposed to have one. This would seem to be to be one of the truest rock and hard place situations you could have.

The 15,000 dollar request? This was a serious low moment. Again, i am picturing her pretty desparate for money and i could definitely see in a state of panic looking for a reason to actually go through with it, and then realizing afterwards it was all a mistake. Possibly immediately regretting asking after doing so. My gut says that I actually don't think she would have been happy and very willing to do it for 5,000 dollars more. It was stupidity talking.

Lastly, in her panic, she probably had a moment where she was probably thinking she had to do the right thing by her conscience...in grave and serious decisions, i think we would all convince ourselves that we have to do what is right, regardless of law. I think she could have felt this way. And if you convince yourself that you have this obligation, i could see committing to it 100% and deciding that while not only have you already decided that it is your moral responsibility to let the baby live, but you have the ability to place them in the best situation possible (in your eyes) and you have a moral responsibly to do that as well. Defiance can feel empowering, and cause you to have serious lack of judgement and clarity between right and wrong. Especially in people who have already proven to lack a good sense of judgement and clarity to begin with.

The truth of the matter is, it doesn't matter if she feels that this baby was better off with this adoptive family. I tend to actually agree with her. But I think a lot of people make choices for their kids that are not so good choices. It doesn't give me the right to go in there, take their kids away and make better choices for them on their behalf.

She F'd up every step of the way. While I do kind of personally believe she was simply striving to do what seemed right in her heart....I think she just F'd up on every big decision she had to make.

The ONLY place where I might have agreed with her is if I made the horribly DUMB decision to sign an agreement to do something I am gravely and morally oppose to...i could see breaking that contract and taking the lumps that come along with doing so. But she went way beyond that.

ETA: AND i dont' see a hero...what i see is a desperate woman trying to fix a horrible mess she made and going about fixing it in all the wrong ways possible.